![[PDF]](/pb-assets/Icons/adobe-pdf-icon-1498649896243.png){kind=icon}
Abstract
Emerging adulthood researchers are often interested in the effects of developmental tasks. The majority of transitions that occur during the period of early/emerging adulthood are not randomized; therefore, their effects on developmental trajectories are subject to potential bias due to confounding. Traditionally, confounding has been addressed using regression adjustment; however, there are viable alternatives, such as propensity score matching and inverse probability of treatment weighting. Propensity scores are probabilities of selecting treatment given values on observed covariates. Inverse probability of treatment weights are also based on estimated probabilities of treatment selection and can be used to create so-called pseudo-populations in which confounders and treatment are unrelated to each other. In longitudinal models, such weighting can occur at multiple time points. This article provides a primer on these weighting methods and illustrates their application to studies of emerging adulthood. We provide annotated computer code for both SPSS and R, for both binary and continuous treatments.
References
|
Angrist, J. D., Pischke, J. (2008). Mostly harmless econometrics: An empiricist’s companion. Princeton, NJ: Princeton University Press. Google Scholar | Crossref | |
|
Austin, P. (2008). A critical appraisal of propensity-score matching in the medical literature between 1996 and 2003. Statistics in Medicine, 27, 2037–2049. Google Scholar | Crossref | Medline | ISI | |
|
Austin, P. (2011). An introduction to propensity score methods for reducing the effects of confounding in observational studies. Multivariate Behavioral Research, 46, 399–424. Google Scholar | Crossref | Medline | ISI | |
|
Berk, R. (2004). Regression analysis: A constructive critique. Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage. Google Scholar | Crossref | |
|
Bray, B., Almirall, D., Zimmerman, R., Lynam, D., Murphy, S. (2006). Assessing the total effect of time-varying predictors in prevention research. Prevention Science, 7, 1–17. doi:10.1007/s11121-005-0023-0 Google Scholar | Crossref | Medline | |
|
Caliendo, M., Kopeinig, S. (2008). Some practical guidance for the implementation of propensity score matching. Journal of Economic Surveys, 22, 31–72. Google Scholar | Crossref | ISI | |
|
Cochran, W., Rubin, D. (1973). Controlling bias in observational studies: A review. Sankhyā: The Indian Journal of Statistics, Series A (1961-2002), 35, 417–446. doi:10.2307/25049893 Google Scholar | |
|
Coffman, D., Zhong, W. (2012). Assessing mediation using marginal structural models in the presence of confounding and moderation. Psychological Methods, 17, 642–664. Google Scholar | Crossref | Medline | |
|
Cole, S., Hernán, M. (2008). Constructing inverse probability weights for marginal structural models. American Journal of Epidemiology, 168, 656–664. Google Scholar | Crossref | Medline | ISI | |
|
Cole, S., Platt, R., Schisterman, E., Chu, H., Westreich, D., Richardson, D., Poole, C. (2010). Illustrating bias due to conditioning on a collider. International Journal of Epidemiology, 39, 417–420. Google Scholar | Crossref | Medline | ISI | |
|
Cook, R., Weisberg, S. (2009). Applied regression including computing and graphics. New York, NY: Wiley. Google Scholar | |
|
Crowson, C., Schenck, L., Green, A., Atkinson, E., Therneau, T. (2013). The basics of propensity scoring and marginal structural models (Technical Report #84), Mayo Clinic, Rochester, MN, 1–37. Google Scholar | |
|
D’Agostino, R. (1998). Tutorial in biostatistics: Propensity score methods for bias reduction in the comparison of a treatment to a non-randomized control group. Statistics in Medicine, 17, 2265–2281. Google Scholar | Crossref | Medline | ISI | |
|
Daniel, R., Cousens, S., De Stavola, B., Kenward, M., Sterne, J. (2013). Methods for dealing with time-dependent confounding. Statistics in Medicine, 32, 1584–1618. doi:10.1002/sim.5686 Google Scholar | Crossref | Medline | |
|
Daniel, R., De Stavola, B., Cousens, S. (2011). gformula: Estimating causal effects in the presence of time-varying confounding or mediation using the g-computation formula. Stata Journal, 11, 479–517. Google Scholar | SAGE Journals | |
|
Dehejia, R., Wahba, S. (2002). Propensity score-matching methods for nonexperimental causal studies. Review of Economics and Statistics, 84, 151–161. Google Scholar | Crossref | ISI | |
|
Greenland, S. (2003). Quantifying biases in causal models: Classical confounding vs collider-stratification bias. Epidemiology, 14, 300–306. Google Scholar | Crossref | Medline | ISI | |
|
Greenland, S., Pearl, J., Robins, J. (1999). Causal diagrams for epidemiologic research. Epidemiology, 10, 37–48. doi:10.2307/3702180 Google Scholar | Crossref | Medline | ISI | |
|
Greenland, S., Robins, J. (1986). Identifiability, exchangeability, and epidemiological confounding. International Journal of Epidemiology, 15, 413–419. doi:10.1093/ije/15.3.413 Google Scholar | Crossref | Medline | ISI | |
|
Gruber, S., van der Laan, M. J. (2009). Targeted maximum likelihood estimation: A gentle introduction (U.C. Berkeley Division of Biostatistics Working Paper Series. Working Paper 252) Berkeley California: Berkeley Electronic Press. Google Scholar | |
|
Gruber, S., van der Laan, M. J. (2011). tmle: An R package for targeted maximum likelihood estimation (Technical Report 275). Division of Biostatistics, University of California, Berkeley. Google Scholar | |
|
Gutman, R., Rubin, D. B. (2015). Estimation of causal effects of binary treatments in unconfounded studies with one continuous covariate. Statistical Methods in Medical Research. doi:10.1177/0962280215570722 Google Scholar | Medline | |
|
Hernán, M., Brumback, B., Robins, J. (2000). Marginal structural models to estimate the causal effect of zidovudine on the survival of HIV-positive men. Epidemiology, 11, 561–570. Google Scholar | Crossref | Medline | ISI | |
|
Hogan, J., Lancaster, T. (2004). Instrumental variables and inverse probability weighting for causal inference from longitudinal observational studies. Statistical Methods in Medical Research, 13, 17–48. doi:10.1191/0962280204sm351ra Google Scholar | SAGE Journals | ISI | |
|
Horvitz, D., Thompson, D. (1952). A generalization of sampling without replacement from a finite universe. Journal of the American Statistical Association, 47, 663–685. Google Scholar | Crossref | ISI | |
|
Huber, P. (1967). The behavior of maximum likelihood estimates under non-standard conditions. In LeCam, L. M., Neyman, J. (Eds.), Proceedings of the Fifth Berkeley Symposium on Mathematical Statistics and Probability (pp. 221–233). Berkeley, California: University of California Press. Google Scholar | |
|
Iacus, S., King, G., Porro, G. (2011). Causal inference without balance checking: Coarsened exact matching. Political Analysis, 20, 1–24. Google Scholar | Crossref | ISI | |
|
Imai, K., Ratkovic, M. (2014). Covariate balancing propensity score. Journal of the Royal Statistical Society: Series B (Statistical Methodology), 76, 243–263. doi:10.1111/rssb.12027 Google Scholar | Crossref | ISI | |
|
Jackson, J., Thoemmes, F., Jonkmann, K., Lüdtke, O., Trautwein, U. (2012). Military training and personality trait development: Does the military make the man, or does the man make the military? Psychological Science, 23, 270–277. doi:10.1177/0956797611423545 Google Scholar | SAGE Journals | ISI | |
|
Jonkmann, K., Thoemmes, F., Lüdtke, O., Trautwein, U. (2014). Personality traits and living arrangements in young adulthood: Selection and socialization. Developmental Psychology, 50, 683–698. Google Scholar | Crossref | Medline | |
|
Kang, J., Schafer, J. (2007). Demystifying double robustness: A comparison of alternative strategies for estimating a population mean from incomplete data. Statistical Science, 22, 523–539. Google Scholar | Crossref | ISI | |
|
King, G., Zeng, L. (2006). The dangers of extreme counterfactuals. Political Analysis, 14, 131–159. doi:10.1093/pan/mpj004 Google Scholar | Crossref | ISI | |
|
Lee, B., Lessler, J., Stuart, E. (2010). Improving propensity score weighting using machine learning. Statistics in Medicine, 29, 337–346. doi:10.1002/sim.3782 Google Scholar | Medline | ISI | |
|
Luellen, J., Shadish, W., Clark, M. (2005). Propensity scores: An introduction and experimental test. Evaluation Review, 29, 530–558. doi:10.1177/0193841x05275596 Google Scholar | SAGE Journals | ISI | |
|
McCaffrey, D., Ridgeway, G., Morral, A. (2004). Propensity score estimation with boosted regression for evaluating causal effects in observational studies. Psychological Methods, 9, 403–425. Google Scholar | Crossref | Medline | ISI | |
|
Mohan, K., Pearl, J, Tian, J. (2013). Graphical models for inference with missing data. In Burges, C.J.C., Bottou, L., Welling, M., Ghahramani, Z., Weinberger, K.Q. (Eds.), Advances in Neural Information Processing Systems (pp. 1277–1285). Red Hook, NY: Curran Associates. Google Scholar | |
|
Pearl, J. (2009). Letter to the editor: Remarks on the method of propensity score. Statistics in Medicine, 28, 1415–1424. Google Scholar | Crossref | Medline | |
|
Robins, J. (1986). A new approach to causal inference in mortality studies with a sustained exposure period—Application to control of the healthy worker survivor effect. Mathematical Modelling, 7, 1393–1512. Google Scholar | Crossref | ISI | |
|
Robins, J., Hernán, M., Brumback, B. (2000). Marginal structural models and causal inference in epidemiology. Epidemiology, 11, 550–560. Google Scholar | Crossref | Medline | ISI | |
|
Rosenbaum, P. (1984). The consquences of adjustment for a concomitant variable that has been affected by the treatment. Journal of the Royal Statistical Society: Series A (General), 147, 656–666. doi:10.2307/2981697 Google Scholar | Crossref | |
|
Rosenbaum, P., Rubin, D. (1983a). Assessing sensitivity to an unobserved binary covariate in an observational study with binary outcome. Journal of the Royal Statistical Society. Series B (Methodological), 45, 212–218. Google Scholar | Crossref | |
|
Rosenbaum, P., Rubin, D. (1983b). The central role of the propensity score in observational studies for causal effects. Biometrika, 70, 41–55. doi:10.1093/biomet/70.1.41 Google Scholar | Crossref | ISI | |
|
Rubin, D. (1979). Using multivariate matched sampling and regression adjustment to control bias in observational studies. Journal of the American Statistical Association, 74, 318–328. Google Scholar | Crossref | ISI | |
|
Rubin, D. (2001). Using propensity scores to help design observational studies: Application to the tobacco litigation. Health Services and Outcomes Research Methodology, 2, 169–188. Google Scholar | Crossref | |
|
Rubin, D. (2005). Causal inference using potential outcomes. Journal of the American Statistical Association, 100, 322–331. Google Scholar | Crossref | ISI | |
|
Schafer, J., Kang, J. (2008). Average causal effects from nonrandomized studies: A practical guide and simulated example. Psychological Methods, 13, 279. Google Scholar | Crossref | Medline | ISI | |
|
Sekhon, J. (2011). Multivariate and propensity score matching software with automated balance optimization: The matching package for R. Journal of Statistical Software, 42, 1–52. Google Scholar | Crossref | ISI | |
|
Sjölander, A. (2009). Propensity scores and m-structures. Statistics in Medicine, 28, 1416–1420. Google Scholar | Crossref | Medline | ISI | |
|
Sterne, J., Tilling, K. (2002). G-estimation of causal effects, allowing for time-varying confounding. Stata Journal, 2, 164–182. Google Scholar | SAGE Journals | |
|
Stuart, E. (2010). Matching methods for causal inference: A review and a look forward. Statistical Science, 25, 1–21. Google Scholar | Crossref | Medline | ISI | |
|
Stuart, E., Cole, S., Bradshaw, C., Leaf, P. (2011). The use of propensity scores to assess the generalizability of results from randomized trials. Journal of the Royal Statistical Society: Series A (Statistics in Society), 174, 369–386. doi:10.1111/j.1467-985X.2010.00673.x Google Scholar | Crossref | ISI | |
|
Thoemmes, F., Kim, E.-S. (2011). A systematic review of propensity score methods in the social sciences. Multivariate Behavioral Research, 46, 90–118. doi:10.1080/00273171.2011.540475 Google Scholar | Crossref | Medline | ISI | |
|
Thoemmes, F., Mohan, K. (2015). Graphical representation of missing data problems. Structural Equation Modeling: A Multidisciplinary Journal, 22, 631–642. Google Scholar | Crossref | |
|
Thoemmes, F., Rose, N. (2014). A cautious note on auxiliary variables that can increase bias in missing data problems. Multivariate Behavioral Research, 49, 443–459. Google Scholar | Crossref | Medline | ISI | |
|
van der Laan, M. J., Polley, E. C., Hubbard, A. E. (2007). Super learner. Statistical Applications in Genetics and Molecular Biology, 6, 1–21. Google Scholar | Crossref | ISI | |
|
van der Wal, W., Geskus, R. (2011). ipw: An R package for inverse probability weighting. Journal of Statistical Software, 43, 1–23. Google Scholar | |
|
VanderWeele, T. (2008). Sensitivity analysis: Distributional assumptions and confounding assumptions. Biometrics, 64, 645–649. Google Scholar | Crossref | Medline | |
|
VanderWeele, T., Arah, O. A. (2011). Bias formulas for sensitivity analysis of unmeasured confounding for general outcomes, treatments, and confounders. Epidemiology (Cambridge, Mass.), 22, 42–52. Google Scholar | Crossref | Medline | |
|
VanderWeele, T., Hawkley, L., Thisted, R., Cacioppo, J. (2011). A marginal structural model analysis for loneliness: Implications for intervention trials and clinical practice. Journal of Consulting and Clinical Psychology, 79, 225–235. Google Scholar | Crossref | Medline | |
|
Vansteelandt, S., Daniel, R. (2014). On regression adjustment for the propensity score. Statistics in Medicine, 33, 4053–4072. Google Scholar | Crossref | Medline | |
|
Vinokur, A., Schul, Y., Vuori, J., Price, R. (2000). Two years after a job loss: Long-term impact of the JOBS program on reemployment and mental health. Journal of Occupational Health Psychology, 5, 32–47. Google Scholar | Crossref | Medline | |
|
West, S. G., Thoemmes, F. (2008). Equating groups. In Alasuutari, P., Brannen, J., Bickman, L. (Eds.), The SAGE handbook of social research methods (pp. 414–430). London, England: Sage. Google Scholar | Crossref | |
|
Westreich, D., Lessler, J., Jonsson Funk, M. (2010). Propensity score estimation: Neural networks, support vector machines, decision trees (CART), and meta-classifiers as alternatives to logistic regression. Journal of Clinical Epidemiology, 63, 826–833. Google Scholar | Crossref | Medline | |
|
White, H. (1980). A heteroskedasticity-consistent covariance matrix estimator and a direct test for heteroskedasticity. Econometrica: Journal of the Econometric Society, 48, 817–838. Google Scholar | Crossref | ISI | |
|
Zhu, Y., Coffman, D. L., Ghosh, D. (2015). A boosting algorithm for estimating generalized propensity scores with continuous treatments. Journal of Causal Inference, 3, 25–40. Google Scholar | Crossref | Medline |
